Featured Article

The chief was a thief

Fraud, betrayal and oversight in a small town

November/December 2016

ByColin May, CFE; Illustrations by Becky Plante

What tears at the fabric of a small town? Theft, betrayal and a loss of confidence in the very institutions that make the town a great place to live. This is the story of how a small gap became a gaping hole in oversight, management and internal controls, which resulted in a theft of more than $250,000.

Farmington, New Hampshire, is a quiet community nestled between the Lakes Region and the seacoast. It's a small, blue-collar New England town with a population of nearly 6,800. The average household income is $51,382. Its claim to fame is being the hometown of President Ulysses S. Grant's vice president, Henry Wilson.

Like many small towns in America, Farmington relies heavily on volunteer fire fighters and emergency medical technicians (EMTs). But a quirk in the town's governance — and apparent lack of sufficient oversight by the public and town leaders — enabled the fire chief to commit a long-running embezzlement scheme.

The scheme, essentially a combination of corrupt diversion of funds and a fraudulent expense reimbursement scheme, cost Farmington more than $270,000, caused turmoil within the town and the fire department ranks, and was a huge public embarrassment. In the end, the chief went to prison, and the town is still reeling from his betrayal of trust.

This case study highlights the importance of public-private oversight, nonprofit internal controls and governance, and how to properly monitor financial affairs in an organization. The sad part is that both paid and volunteer fire departments across the nation seem to encounter fraud frequently. A Google news search for "fire department theft" turns up 5.3 million hits. As fraud examiners, we can learn a lot from this case.

Related Articles

Boards' familiarity of 'bullybezzlers' allowed fraud

Paul Laneuville and Carl Walters are true examples of a phenomenon I call the “bullybezzler.” Both cost their organizations hundreds of thousands of dollars. And the employees they bullied eventually brought them both down.

Using one fraud to hide another

In each of the cases I’ve covered in recent columns, the only fraud involved cooking the books. But in other cases, fraudsters commit financial statement fraud as the secondary act to conceal the primary frauds.

The contempt of families

The embezzlers’ fraud wheelhouse contains a classic tool for “misappropriating funds” from their employers: the ghost employee. Simply put, “The term ghost employee refers to someone on the payroll who does not actually work for the victim company.” (2015 Fraud Examiners Manual, 1.456) Ghost employees are miracles of physics: they might or might not exist and companies don’t employ them, yet they draw regular paychecks.